About your Search

20120930
20121008
STATION
FOXNEWS 12
MSNBC 5
MSNBCW 5
KNTV (NBC) 2
WBAL (NBC) 2
CNBC 1
CNN 1
CNNW 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KPIX (CBS) 1
WMAR (ABC) 1
WRC (NBC) 1
LANGUAGE
English 45
Search Results 0 to 44 of about 45 (some duplicates have been removed)
of general electric, jack welch, who joins us right now. jack, you made a lot of news today. here is the tweet you put out this morning. unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. and i'm just wondering, i understand the way it works is the president gets a heads-up on the unemployment number 4:00 the day before and has to keep it to himself. you're saying in your tweet this morning that the news went the other way, that the people working for the president somehow got the bls, the bureau of labor statistics, and played with the numbers so it would come down below 8% today. how does it work from your perspective? what happened here? >> well, chris, all i can talk about are some of the numbers. we had 600,000 government jobs added in the last two months. we had 873,000 jobs by a household survey, which is a total estimate from 50,000 phone calls. of those 600,000 were temporary workers. chris, these numbers are all a series of assumptions, tons of assumptions, and it just seems somewhat coincidental that the month before the elec
, i think they'll be l. >> hey, larry, huge interview tonight. you have jack welch, what else is cooking? >> 7.8% unemployment. is this magic number of president obama for real or was it cooked? good evening, i'm larry kudlow. this is "the kudlow report." team obama doing a victory lap, rejoicing over the 7.8% victory lap. my guest, jack welch, is questioning whether the numbers were cooked to help president obama. mr. welch will respond live and talk to me in a moment. this whole thing comes as the romney roll continues. scott rasmussen has three polls showing a dead heat in battle ground states, hai, virginia, florida. even the liberal magazine "the new yorker" sees it on their front cover, mitt romney pulling a clint eastwood, debating an empty chair. first up, it was the tweet that was heard around the world. my good friend jack welch set off a social media firestorm. take a look at his tweet. "unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers, end quote. he's chase by accusing the white house of skewing the data to help preside
theorists who openly suggested the white house manipulated the numbers. forward ceo jack welch led the crowd with this tweet "unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything can't debate so change numbers". he refused to back down on last night's msnbc. >> i have no evidence to prove that. i just raised the question. >> you didn't raise the question. you said these chicago guys will do anything so they change the numbers. you want to take that back? >> this is an assertion. >> jimmying with these numbers. corruption here. infiltration or getting to -- it's not funnies jack. you're talking about the president of the united states playing with the bureau of labor statistics numbers. this is mixing stuff. do you want to take back the charge here? >> i don't want to take back one word in that tweet. >> oh, this is good. what's the word from the white house folks today on these jobs numbers? are they being cautious about them at all? >> you heard the president be cautious. the president and his advisers and everybody on down the line is going to be very quick to add that there are
in the latest job report and showing a dip in the unemployment. former chairman jack welch is skeptical. meaning that employers added a modest 114,000 jobs and the drop comes at a critical time for the president who is coming off a weak debate performance with romney. joining us is new york times best selling author out with the latest book. ann coulter. at this point in time the president said we will be at 5.6 and enjoying that part of the economy and a more comfortable position and now they are running with this new number. what is your response. >> it is noticeable that a lot of economist are saying this is not possible. you would need more than 114,000 jobbings. i don't think it matters except to broadcasting tv shows or writing for newspaper what number they throw up on the screen. people know they are out of work and in jobs and they are way overqualified for and working part-time. so many people are going out of business and under working now. 23 million unemployed difference does it make? >> the numbers simply write away the 211,000,000 people stopping to look for people. >> oh, yes. pe
in conservative corners were arguing about the actual numbers. jack welch had a tweet about unbelievable jobs numbers, the chicago guys will do anything, can't debate because they change the numbers. he was on "hardball" with chris matthews and this is how he explained what's behind this analysis. >> i've reviewed 14 businesses this week from restaurants to rental cars, to widgets. i have seen everybody with a, a third quarter equal to or weaker than the first quarter. in order to get 873,000 new jobs, you would have to have a gdp going at 4% to 5%. the second quarter was downgraded from 1.7 to 1.3. the third quarter is not going to be very strong. it just defies the imagination to have a surge larger than -- any surge since 1983, a month before the election. i leave it to you to do all the analysis. >> you know -- >> one of the most important ceos of america, formerly of general electric does this ring true to you, speaker? >> actually since it's a survey, is this outside the statistical bounds of their survey, which is plausible, but irrelevant. what's interesting is you have a president, w
some were arguing about the actual numbers. jack welch made a lot of headlines with a tweet that said, unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so they change the numbers without any substantiation. he was on "hardball" with chris matthews and this is how he explained it. >> i've reviewed 14 businesses this week. from restaurants to widgets. i have seen everybody with a third quarter equal to or weaker than the first quarter. in order to get 873,000 new jobs, you would have to have a g.d.p. going at 4% to 5%. the second quarter was downgraded from 1.7% to 1.3%. the third quarter is not going to be very strong. it just defies the imagination to have a surge larger than any surge since 1983 a month before the election. i leave it to you to do all the analysis. >> one of the most important ceos in america. formerly of general electric. does this ring true? >> well, it rings true to me. since it's a survey, is this outside of the statistical bounds of their survey, which is plausible but irrelevant. but you have a president who says last budget got zero
. jack welch is here and only here. welcome, everyone, i am here no neil cavuto and this is "your world." the tweak that has everyone talking, jerk welch tweeting this moments after the release of the jobs report. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate? change the numbers. the labor secretary calling the charge "ludicrous." jack welch. >>guest: i have been called worse than that by some. look, i have no idea where this number came from but you look at it and we added 600,000 jobs in the government sector in august and september which is the largest number we have had since the study has been done, 600,000 jobs. in september, household employment added 780,000 jobs. that's the highest since 1983. i have been reviewing bigs all week, some dozen businesses. no one is stronger than they were in the third quarter than in the 2nd quarter. we have been told there are needed 150,000 to 200,000 to stay even. the last two months we have gone from 83 to 81, and now we are changing the household number assumptions. i don't know what the right number is, but i will tell you these numbers
did come down. unlike prominent conservative jack welch who tweeted this morning, unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate, so change numbers. okay. tuesday he was a ruthless race baiter. yesterday he was a feckless delivery boy. today he's don corleone, and there's more where that came from. congressman west, take it away. >> you are alleging specifically that the president is engaging in a cover-up of the data. you are saying that the administration is actively manipulating that data, correct? >> well, absolutely. >> good news is all this conspiracy may open up even more jobs. demand for the manufacture and sale of tin foil is increasing as we speak. essential material for all those tin hats. here in new york jonathan alter, a columnist for bloomberg view and democratic strategist julian epstein and john harwood, chief washington correspondent and political writer for "the new york times." julian, so, the bureau of labor statistics is now to be lumped in with false memory syndrome, satanic abuse, and the abduction of children byu fos in terms of
. it raised some suspicions among governor romney's allies. on friday morning, jack welch, the former chairman of ge said unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. steve forbes follows up and says welch is right. does governor romney put any stock in those theories and have any suspicions at all about the bls numbers? >> george, the numbers themselves are very damning. when you look at it, we had fewer jobs created in september than were created in august, fewer jobs created in august than were created in july. our unemployment rate has come down because for -- since president obama took office, for every new job created, more than six workers have left the labor force. if labor force participation was what it was when the president took office, unemployment would be around 10.7%. these jobs that were added in september were largely part-time jobs. so we still have 23 million americans -- that number has not changed at all -- who are either unemployed or out of work entirely or are underemployed working or out of the workforce entirely or un
is the former g.e. ceo jack welch. unbelievable job numbers. they can't debate so they change the numbers. he appeared earlier today on "your world." >> these numbers don't smell right when you think about where the economy is right now. every economist predicted roughly 90,000 to 120,000. this economy doesn't feel like the employment improved this level. it is just -- maybe it's a coincidence that the month before the election, we have a number that comes out 1/10th below when the president took office. >> sean: jack welch is not the only one tawing of this timely development. listen to what business insider said on fox business new york this morning. >> i feel like i am watching a movie, a suspense movie. because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate. and somebody needs to dig real deep into this. how in the world, miraculously, we have the best flz 30 years, right before the election? somebody needs to do an investigation, like they are doing an investigation in libbia. they need to investigate the numbers because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate? >
a number that comes out 1/10th below when the president took office. >> sean: jack welch is not the only one tawing of this timely development. listen to what business insider said on fox business new york this morning. >> i feel like i am watching a movie, a suspense movie. because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate. and somebody needs to dig real deep into this. how in the world, miraculously, we have the best flz 30 years, right before the election? somebody needs to do an investigation, like they are doing an investigation in libbia. they need to investigate the numbers because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate? >> the same administration not telling the truth about benghazi and libya and the death of four americans. there are very important questions that need to be asked of the obama administration. when you look at the hardidate athere is no way to explain how the rate decreased from 8.1% to 7.8%. as the former director of the nonpartisan cbo put it, it is simply implausible. a few things to keep in mind. the real unemployment rate remain
. not everyone convinced, though. yesterday jack welch, the former chairman and ceo of ge, tweeted unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate, so change numbers. he's obviously very influential man. when he tweets, people listen. is there any way that these kinds of numbers can be manipulated? >> he tweets, people listen, they retweet, they write about it and we certainly talked about it a lon on cnbc. the fact of the matter is the bureau of labor statistics has been calculating this number since 1948. it's a scientific survey. they poll 140,000 businesses. you definitely have a giant sample here. what some people are saying is a possibility is that the type of businesses sampled were ones that were skewed towards jobs added. those place where is they might have add more part-time workers. we also saw a giant jump in the number of people employed from the age group of 20 to 24. the biggest jump since 1964. some of these businesses that employed more young people being pulled? it's unlikely. it's really an issue of how much data you can actually get together in 3
? the politicians have been duking it out. >> the most positive part of the jobs report was the tweet by jack welch this morning. he is claiming that the chicago gang had basically -- cooked the books with the job numbers. i don't think that's the case. but i thought it was surprising that jack welch. think before you tweet. >> greta: yes, indeet deed. he is getting a lot of heat for that. >> i think it's a mixed message. the unemployment number is driven by the household survey, which is very volatile. september typically scr is the most volatile month. what i look at is the establishment survey, which is important because that is done with actual business scpoarns they are surveyed on a regular basis in terms of jobs they are creating. and the 114,000 jobs that were created this last month is very anemic, barely enough to keep up with population growth. so you couple the anemic job growth and the reset from gdp and revisited it to 1.2% growth last quarter. the fed is printing mon weqe3 and europe is imploding right now. we are looking at at an environment with a total void of leader help in washi
. you are jack welch. jack, you've got to take this opportunity while everybody is listening to you to actually say, yes, anderson, i'm taking that tweet back. i'm going to send a new tweet to say i was exaggerating. there are problems bls should look into but to throw out an accusation that's like asking the government how often do you beat your wife. >> i should have had a question mark at the back of it, ali, let's face it, but the facts, are ali, no matter how you want to look at this, we had 25 economists polled before this number came out. the average number they expected was about 115,000. not one of them -- >> yes. >> had a number below 1.1. >> labor secretary hilda so li s shot back at the critics telling cnn it was insulting for people to suggest her department was manipulating numbers for the president's benefit. >>> the obama and romney campaigns are ratcheting up the rhetoric in the wake of the jobs report. our political editor paul steinhauser hats candidate's comments. one set of numbers, two sets of eyes. >> yeah, very, very different responses to the friday jobs rep
. doug we talked about a tweet from jack welch. did that ignite the controversy? >>reporter: the recovery surrounding friday's release of the unemployment numbers continues to swirl after jack welch, the respected former c.e.o. of g.e. treated "unbelievable jobs numbers. the chicago guys will do anything. can't debate? change numbers." facing criticism if the tweet he stuck by the criticism of the numbers. >> this number is made up of a whole mess of assumptions: who is participating, who is not working, who is trying for work, who has dropped out. it just begs the question. i think there ought to be a good discussion how this number is calculated. >>reporter: most analysts and the obama campaign are dismanage the criticisms as "without evidence." >> we wonder why institutions in this country are, the perception of institutions are failing, because people go on tv and make sufficient h stuff -- make stuff up. >> they had full charge of the first two years and the policies this president put into place actually made it worse, including the fact that obamacare is tale, if you ask employers,
numbers so wrong. jack welch went further obviously the former ceo of g.e. and he said unbelievable jobs numbers. the these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so they change the numbers. set person who suggested something fishy was going on. >> and of course our own lou dobbs has said no the bureau of labor statistics is insulated entity and peter morris is i on our show a short time ago said no, this isn't the case that they would never cook the books for a white house. that's not something they would do. they are economists and statisticians and there might be anomaly in the numbers. here was jack welch yesterday talking to cavuto and he said something smells funny here, listen. >> these numbers don't smell right when you think about where the economy is right now. every economist this morning predicted roughly 90 to 120,000 and 8.2 unemployment came out very favorably just one tenth of a point below when the president took office. >> well, it's funny when people manipulate numbers back and forth on both sides. i always think about the 23 million people who don't have a job an
that there is further proof that the economy continues to heal. others not so sure. jack welch tweeted this moments ago. unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything, can't debate so change numbers end quote. martha: hilda so liz says that that notion is lewd today rust. joined by chris wallace anchor of fox news sunday . good morning, chris. >> good to be with you. martha: what do you make about the backlash for this 7.8 number? >> it's understandable, because it's good news for president obama at a time when he very much needed it. the fact is that he had a bad debate, that his campaign was raoeulgs a reeling, is an overstatement but hit a serious pothole. and the talking point, which is that the unemployment rate under this president has been over 8% for 48 months, they can't say that any more. and obviously some romney supporters aren't happy about that. martha: whenever you look at the economic numbers i always wonder. obviously as you point out the president's detractors will try to mine mice the number and the president will build it up. it's down to everyone's individual econo
in the debate wednesday night. >> nancy, i want to ask you something that jack welch, former ceo of general electric tweeted this morning. he is a romney supporter. unbelievable jobs numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so change numbers. we've had a response from the labor secretary, hilda solis, who called that ludicrous. this will become a political issue now as to whether these numbers -- as to whether they cooked the books. >> reporter: that's right, norah. the obama said they basically did not want to dignify it with a response. it is getting a lot of pickup. so much so that hida solis is responding to it and some republicans as well are saying that's just impossible. >>> earlier before the jobs report came out, we spoke with former presidential candidate howard dean. we asked the former vermont governor about criticism of president obama's debate performance by fellow democrats. >> it is a lot of hand wringing first of all. the president did fine. mitt romney was very aggressive and they should have been prepared for that. he had had been v
and significant decrease in the unemployment rate. jack welch, he went to as far to suggest that the numbers may be manipulated by the obama administration. do you think that the numbers add up? >> i think the suggestion that the numbers was cooked is relatively ridiculous. that being said. economists at the labor department will admit freely that there is a lot of margin of error in these numbers. a month after each job report these numbers are revised upward or downward. the question of the number came out of the household survey, 800,000 plus number, there is a lot of margin for error, possibly as much as 400,000. that is admitted by folks within the labor department, as well. i think you can't get too hung up on the overall numbers because typically these are revised upward or downward. that tends to happen a month later when we stop paying attention. >> heather: what will the numbers do in terms of swaying voters' opinions, specifically undecided voter? do you expect to see a change in the polls as a result of this? >> it's a tough question. i generally think the jobs reports do not move as
his anniversary on the night of the debate. >> peter: and interesting 7.8% number, economists and jack welch, where did this come from, the raw numbers put out and a disconnect. >> clayton: we have to look the at revised numbers a few months later and maybe find out in december what the true number was or were in september. but we have new numbers out of ohio. the all important battle ground state of ohio where president obama has been leading significantly there. in recent polls, well not significantly, but 5 or 4 points accord to go what karl rove was talking about, 49-50%. and looking at virginia, and there mitt romney has pulled ahead of president obama 49-48% within the mar begin of error, but definitely experiencing a debate bounce. and speaking of which, let's talk about the money they have been able to raise because this plays into how people are feeling after the debate as well. in just the 48 hours since the debate, mitt romney has been able to raise 12 million dollars online and just staggering numbers. >> peter: at the same time, the president announced that they raised 181
Search Results 0 to 44 of about 45 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (31 Dec 2014)